Cited by 186Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsForensic and Genetic Research

Use of unphased multilocus genotype data in indirect association studies

Clayton, David, Chapman, Juliet, Cooper, Jason·2004·Genetic Epidemiology

Abstract

It is usually assumed that detection of a disease susceptability gene via marker polymorphisms in linkage disequilibrium with it is facilitated by consideration of marker haplotypes. However, capture of the marker haplotype information requires resolution of gametic phase, and this must usually be inferred statistically. Recently, we questioned the value of the marker haplotype information, and suggested that certain analyses of multivariate marker data, not based on haplotypes explicitly and not requiring resolution of gametic phase, are often more powerful than analyses based on haplotypes. Here, we review this work and assess more carefully the situations in which our conclusions might apply. We also relate these analyses to alternative approaches to haplotype analysis, namely those based on haplotype similarity and those inspired by cladistics. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gepi.20032

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Approaches that capture subtle synergistic effects among many loci in a region, or among different variant types affecting gene function, such as sequence- or functional-similarity-based methods, are probably also suitable.

    “However, methods which can account for subtle synergistic effects of many loci within a defined region and/or different forms of variation that might contribute to gene function, such as those rooted in sequence or functional similarity56, 57, 87, 88 are also likely to be appropriate.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clayton, D., Chapman, J., & Cooper, J.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Clayton, David
Venue
Genetic Epidemiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-10-12
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
415-428
ISSN
  • 0741-0395 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2272
OpenAlex
W2029784047
Cited by
186
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
15.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Genetic Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
Keywords
linkage disequilibrium, susceptibility genes
MeSH terms
Genetic Markers, Genetics, Population, Genotype, Haplotypes, Humans, Models, Genetic, Models, Statistical, Linkage Disequilibrium, Genetic Predisposition to Disease

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review